(O&M) Mohinder Singh & Ors. Vs Raghbir Saran

The agreement to sell between the parties in respect of the suit land is admitted. The defendant has taken a stand that the agreement to sell was in writing and that the total sale consideration for the entire land measuring 35 kanals 2 marlas was fixed at ₹1,00,000/-. On the other hand, the plaintiff has asserted that the agreement to sell was oral and that the land was agreed to be sold @ ₹12,000/- per acre. Thus, the core dispute between the parties is confined to the rate at which the defendant agreed to sell the land. Significantly, the date fixed for execution of the sale deed, i.e., 15.06.1982, is admitted. It is further an admitted position that pursuant to the agreement to sell dated 30.11.1981, the defendant executed a sale deed dated 04.12.1981 in favour of son of the plaintiff in respect of 13 kanals 19 marlas of land for a consideration of ₹21,000/-. Although the said sale deed is a marked document, both the parties have admitted its execution. In such circumstances, the same can safely be taken into consideration and constitutes a relevant piece of evidence for determining the agreed rate of land. A perusal of the sale deed dated 04.12.1981 clearly indicates that the

¶84

ASHISH 2026.05.05 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order

¶85

-25-

¶86

RSA-1115-1992 (O&M)

¶87

land was sold @ ₹12,000/- per acre. This concluded sale transaction between the same parties having genesis in the agreement to sell admitted by parties lends substantial corroboration to the case set up by the plaintiff. Accordingly, this Court finds that the courts below have rightly accepted the stand of the plaintiff that the agreed rate was ₹12,000/- per acre.

¶88

The defendant, though asserting that the agreement to sell was in writing, has failed to discharge the onus of proving the same. The defendant did not step into the witness box and instead chose to contest the case through his proxy. There is no evidence on record to establish that the son was present at the time of execution of the agreement to sell. It is also noteworthy that the issue of readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff was given up by the appellant–defendant before the learned lower appellate court. Consequently, the findings recorded by the courts below on this aspect have attained finality.

¶89

In view of the above, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below, which are based on proper appreciation of evidence. However, considering that the agreement to sell pertains to the year 1981, this Court deems it appropriate, in order to balance the equities between the parties, to direct the respondent– plaintiff to pay an additional amount of ₹20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only) to the appellant–defendant over and above the agreed sale consideration for execution of the sale deed. The respondent–plaintiff shall

¶90

ASHISH 2026.05.05 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order

¶91

-26-

¶92

RSA-1115-1992 (O&M)

¶93

pay the aforesaid amount of ₹20,00,000/- to the appellant–defendant within

¶94

a period of three months from the date of this judgment.

¶95